My thoughts on the draft

[albefree69]

This is something I posted at The Huddle about the draft and I'm posting it here so that I can refer to it later without going back to the Huddle. I also want to be on record about my thoughts on the draft.

I know that everyone is basking in the wonderfullness of our draft but I want to go on record as saying: Meh! :|

Here's what we did with the NFL.com number grades on each pick and my short comment:

SNISHER
Round 1 #8 Tavon Austin WR 91.4 Good player but paid too much.
Round 1 #30 Alec Ogletree OLB 84.0 Good player but not my choice.
Round 3 #71 T.J. McDonald FS 66.5 Hate the pick.
Round 3 #92 Stedman Bailey WR 79.0 OK player.
Round 4 #113 Barrett Jones C 71.1 Good player.
Round 5 #149 Brandon McGee CB 60.1 I'll take Snishers word on him.
Round 5 #160 Zac Stacy RB 69.0 Don't like the pick and waste of ammo.

AL
Round 1 #16 Eric Reid FS 82.5 Best FS not named Vaccaro IMO. Picked by the Whiners #18.
Round 1 #30 Justin Hunter WR 81.8 Best WR without concerns. Picked by the Titans #34.
Round 2 #46 Arthur Brown OLB 90.3 Best 4-3 OLB IMO. Picked by the Ravens #56.
Round 3 #78 Shawn Williams SS 74.8 Best SS available. Picked by the Bengals #84.
Round 3 #92 Quinton Patton WR 83.8 Great WR. Picked by the Whiners #128.
Round 4 #113 Barrett Jones C 71.1 Good player.
Round 5 #149 Brandon McGee CB 60.1 I'll take Snishers word on him.
Round 6 #184 Khalid Wooten CB 61.8 Better than McGee IMO.
Round 6 #198 Michael Williams TE 68.9 Best blocking TE IMO.
Round 7 #222 Reid Fragel RT 77.0 Big upside developmental RT.

I liked the trade down at #22 so I kept that.
I see picks 1-5 as starters.
Picks 6-7 same as Snisher.
Picks 8-10 as high value and much better than Snishers picks. Or lack of picks.

It will be interesting for me to see how my picks compare at the end of the year.

 

[-X-]

I'm sorry, but I can't accept the premise.

How a player fares on another team is largely irrelevant because they may or may not pan out the same with the Rams if the draft went the way a fan wanted it to go. Their draft (Snead/Fisher's) depended on system fit, player attitude and personality, needs, and any number of other considerations that may not align with another team's criteria of fit, attitude, needs, etc.

I mean, it'll be interesting to see how your guys pan out, but I just don't think it will mean much in the grand scheme of things. Sometimes players just do better in a different environment/team, or take to a certain coach more than another. Opportunity and supporting cast also plays a fairly large role in a player's success.

Just too many variables to try and make a lateral comparison, Albe.
IMO, of course.

 

[albefree69]

X doubting my premise:
I'm sorry, but I can't accept the premise.

How a player fares on another team is largely irrelevant because they may or may not pan out the same with the Rams if the draft went the way a fan wanted it to go. Their draft (Snead/Fisher's) depended on system fit, player attitude and personality, needs, and any number of other considerations that may not align with another team's criteria of fit, attitude, needs, etc.

I mean, it'll be interesting to see how your guys pan out, but I just don't think it will mean much in the grand scheme of things. Sometimes players just do better in a different environment/team, or take to a certain coach more than another. Opportunity and supporting cast also plays a fairly large role in a player's success.

Just too many variables to try and make a lateral comparison, Albe.
IMO, of course.

Au contraire! Depends on how you do the comparison.

A) Home runs = Pro Bowls made or top three in the voting
B) Successes = starters on the team that drafted the player
C) OK picks = good back ups on the team that drafted the player
D) Place holder
F) Fails = Player is no longer on the team.

I'm gonna check the players yearly but I won't give my final grade until after the 3rd year is over.

Sure there will be anomalies like not being able to grade Sam adequately because of the O-line problems but that should average out.

But I agree that it will mean absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. :lol:

It will tell me something about my ability to judge the players in that draft.

 

[-X-]

I'm gonna check the players yearly but I won't give my final grade until after the 3rd year is over.

I'll set my watch. :lol:

 

[albefree69]

I think we should we synchronize our watches.

Ready, 1 2 3 go! :lol:

 

[Username]

Tavon Austin was the only legit playmaker in the draft. Justin Hunter no concerns LOL? He's already fucking injured again! Reid and Patton are overrated as fuck imo. Would take Markus Wheaton over Patton in a heartbeat, would not draft Reid unless he fell. Agree on the McDonald pick.

Imo, in a draft that didn't have anything going for it, the Rams did a solid job.

 

[Lesson]

What Tavon Austin is making, and if he performs like we all think he can, at his salary will be a steal for a few seasons. When payday comes, he will, hopefully, have proven his worth and a raise.

 

[albefree69]

Austin needs to be as good as TWO high quality starters because that's what he cost us. There are very few players that are worth two high quality starters. I hope he's one of them but I have my doubts. I don't doubt that he'll be good, just not that good.

 

[DR RAM]

Can we at least get through training camp before we start determining what kind of players any of these guys will be? Brave posting this, I'll give you that.

 

[albefree69]

eek: :lol:

 

[Yamahopper]

Austin needs to be as good as TWO high quality starters because that's what he cost us. There are very few players that are worth two high quality starters. I hope he's one of them but I have my doubts. I don't doubt that he'll be good, just not that good.

To me it was simple . Austin was best playmaker in the draft, Rams needed a playmaker more than anything else. So they went and got him. They could have drafted all the Woods, Patton's and Hunters they wanted but still would have had a bunch more 2nd rate playmakers.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Austin needs to be as good as TWO high quality starters because that's what he cost us. There are very few players that are worth two high quality starters. I hope he's one of them but I have my doubts. I don't doubt that he'll be good, just not that good.

To me it was simple . Austin was best playmaker in the draft, Rams needed a playmaker more than anything else. So they went and got him. They could have drafted all the Woods, Patton's and Hunters they wanted but still would have had a bunch more 2nd rate playmakers.

I'm with you Yamahopper!

Want a special talent?... it sometimes takes some chances. Austin is a different breed than the rest listed here.



Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[jjab360]

I prefer the guys we drafted, tbh. Your draft gives us more solid players, but we have enough solid players as is. What we need are playmakers and difference makers, guys who can take over in crunch time and that's what we got. Quality over quantity.

 

[catcheryea]

The only thing I didn't like about our draft was that we only got one safety, and I'm still unsure about that pick. I do think that TJ can be a good in the box guy, especially if we can pick up a guy to roam free and play over the top. But I digress. The reason most people think we gave up too much is only because we didn't have a second round pick. But if you really break it down, the swap of 3rd rounders gives us a huge edge because we only really gave up the 2nd for the 1st and a 7th for a 3rd. That being said, I was a huge Tavon fan and I was willing to give up whatever to get him. I would've rather gone safety at 30, specifically Jon Cyprien, and gotten an OLB later on, but Ogletree had top 15 talent, so I understand the pick. I think Stedman will be good insurance for Quick if he doesn't pan out. Jones will be out starting center for years to come. I would've rather had Jordan Poyer instead of McGee, but he will only be our #4 corner for the next few years, plus he can help return, and at the very least, he's an incredible gunner. I like the Stacy pick as a sleeper but because it meant not getting that second safety, especially with Bacarri still on the board.

 

[-X-]

Austin needs to be as good as TWO high quality starters because that's what he cost us. There are very few players that are worth two high quality starters. I hope he's one of them but I have my doubts. I don't doubt that he'll be good, just not that good.

Well, that's impossible. No NFL player is as good as TWO high quality starters. Not even Peyton Manning. So I don't think you can quantify it like that. All he (Austin) needs to be is a very good receiver who boosts our offensive output, because that's where we were lacking (clearly) and he was the best rated receiver on the board. You can either go up and get him, or settle. SETTLE, being the operative word for this HC and GM. Because nobody else they scouted, visited, worked out, or interviewed, would have been as valuable to *this* offense, and to them, as Tavon Austin.

I do understand what you're saying if he doesn't work out, but still. Rarely do teams win Super Bowls by sitting back and settling for players they didn't otherwise covet in the draft, or losing out on free agents by not being aggressive suitors for players that could help the team exponentially.

 

[albefree69]

Yamahopper replied:
To me it was simple . Austin was best playmaker in the draft, Rams needed a playmaker more than anything else. So they went and got him. They could have drafted all the Woods, Patton's and Hunters they wanted but still would have had a bunch more 2nd rate playmakers.

And you know that they will be 2nd rate playmakers how? :lol:

The draft went like you wanted it too and it can certainly work out like you and the Rams FO envisioned. It's just not the way I would have done it. Especially when we still had and have many holes remaining on our roster.

 

[albefree69]

X offered:
I do understand what you're saying if he doesn't work out, but still. Rarely do teams win Super Bowls by sitting back and settling for players they otherwise coveted in the draft, or losing out on free agents by not being aggressive suitors for players that could help the team exponentially.

Well as I said, it could work out great but the odds are with me I think.

As for trading up leading to better (SB worthy) teams I totally disagree with that. I have seen many compilations of data that show trading up is rarely worth the cost. A point that I agree with.

If you're looking for that final piece to the puzzle as in A. J. Green, then sure it makes sense. We, on the other hand, have/had many holes that needed filling.

But there is certainly more than one way to skin the cat eh? :bg:

 

[EastRam]

I think we should we synchronize our watches.

Ready, 1 2 3 go! :lol:

Don't you have a talking watch Albe? :rofl: :rofl:

Training camp time! Ya!

 

[Yamahopper]

Yamahopper replied:
To me it was simple . Austin was best playmaker in the draft, Rams needed a playmaker more than anything else. So they went and got him. They could have drafted all the Woods, Patton's and Hunters they wanted but still would have had a bunch more 2nd rate playmakers.

And you know that they will be 2nd rate playmakers how? :lol:

The draft went like you wanted it too and it can certainly work out like you and the Rams FO envisioned. It's just not the way I would have done it. Especially when we still had and have many holes remaining on our roster.

Because they would have been rated and drafted before Austin if they were thought to have that upside. lol. Didn't see anyone trading that high for up for them.
As a consensus of 32 GM's actions validate the draft class. Rams got by cheap only giving up what they did to get the consensus best offensive player in the draft.
While the Rams have holes to fill, a bunch of lesser picks won't get them to the SB but a few high end players will.

 

[albefree69]

Yeah but your whole position requires that the other two players are 2nd rate. I'll bet all the other teams that drafted at #16 through #48 don't think that way about their picks.